Uk elections?

[Guest]

I was amazed not to find something about the upcoming UK elections... I'm not too sure why.

If there is anything wrong with the topic, please do what you wish to this new thread.

So, bascially - who do you think is going to win in the next UK election, and why?
I would go for Blair, because there doesn't seem like another likely opponent (though Michael Howard isn't doing too badly).

[Gio]

Labour will kick ass as usual as the Tories are seen as nothing but an elite group of people who hunt fox's for no reason. The LibDems, they're just too funny. They're the John Kerry of UK politics. Where really are they?

Although, I do know the Mr. Blair is unpopular among many circles, him leaving the labour party in my opinion would spell electoral defeat for them. Under Blair, labour has become one of the greatest electoral machines in world history. I don't see them doing well at all under the chancellor. Well, that's just my opinion. History will tell us within the next few years.

[Ray]

Blair was a charismatic leader and still is to some extent.

Even if he quits the Labour, the second rung is pretty good -Gordon Brown and the others.

Labour will still win, even though they will get a drubbing in the Moslem dominated areas for his war on Iraq. Will it be material is the question that only a Brit who has some idea of elections in Britain can tell us.

Conservatives not having a leader of the charm that Blair exudes have no hope in hell.

The thread can move if some Brit posts some hot news from the Blighty.


In keeping with the fashion of the threads, I quote with religious piety:

He who sits in the heavens shall laugh.
--Psalm 2:4

[dave angel]

labour will still win the coming election, but its likely that its majority will both be reduced and - more importantly - that the parlimently labour party will be far less disciplined than in the recent past.

labour has three problems: the first is that many of the traditional labour voters and therefore local activists are very seriously upset about party policy which has moved a long way in order to be a vote winner. it has won votes but while the old hands stay with the patry out of loyalty, they aren't happy and would drop the current leadership if they could get away with it politicly.

the second is that the people who have taken labour from being the opposition to being the government - the 'converted' voters, are not happy either, they apper to resent the 'non-delivery' of social programs that are very expensive yet have failed to appear. these are former tory voters who liked tony blair and disliked the various tory leaders since john major, but still have both no 'gut' loyalty to labour and a tory 'instinct'.

the third is of course iraq: politically divisive on all sides, regardless of the rights and wrongs of the whole thing i think you could talk to 50 random people on the street and struggle to find 2 who think the governments handling of the affair deserved any praise. that doesn't mean that only 4% support the war, nothing like, but the government has a real problem with the number and previous political persuasion of people it has offended over iraq.

this election will be much more interesting than any other in the last 20 years.

[lwarmonger]

Is there a party that has a viable chance of shaping policy, that those voters who are further left who normally vote labor can go to? I know that the fact that the Green Party hasn't a shot in hell of getting anyone elected is why so much of the left wing of the democratic party here in the states stays democratic. I am aware of the differences in the government structure, and that it isn't exactly the same situation, but is there a viable party that is left of labor?

I just ask this because I think that dissaffection with the Iraq War may push many of those who are on the fringes of the party out, and while those on the right can go conservative (or Tory?), I don't know if those on the left have any place to go.

[dave angel]

in a funny way almost all political parties are 'left' of labour in the UK. the traditional left/right comparison is difficult because the parties appear to be all over the place with regards to economics, libertarianism vs authoritarianism and defence.

labour has become very authoritarian (detention without trial, national identity cards etc), economicly liberal by reducing tax rates for the poorer economic classes while not increasing tax for the better off and using private firms for the provision of public services and yet quite 'old labour' with large state handouts to the 'working poor' in relation to child support and child care.

the LibDems are more readily identifiable as being 'lefty' and 'greeny', but are very libertarian and while opposed to the iraq war aren't an 'anti-war' party by any stretch of the imagination. they are more pro-european than the others but don't like the EU as it is.

the tories are, as ever, split on libertarian/authoritarian grounds, europe and immigration. they appear more economicly liberal but have stuck to most of labours spending commitments - they disagree on how the money should be spent, but not that it should be spent.

two other parties figure, the first, the British National Party is hard nationalist, anti-immigration, quite authoritarian and fairly traditional socialist.

the UK Independance Party, is fairly libertarian, anti EU and Europe (and remember, they are not the same thing) and anti-immigration.

there appears to be some cross-over between the last two as the UKIP is more respectable and is often described as the 'BNP in Blazers'. despite the massive philosophical differences between the parties in terms of social and economic libertarianism/authoritarianism, it appears that most members are motivated by the europe and immigration questions.

moral issues like abortion and gay marriage don't have any effect on british politics, the political parties deliberately don't have an official position on them and its left to individual MP's to decide which way to vote.

there appears to be much less party loyalty than 30 years ago, probably because of the shifting plates of political thought. 20 years ago the working poor voted tory and now they vote labour, libertarians - like me - probably would have voted labour but now wouldn't touch them with a burning stick and greens might well vote libdem or tory, both of whom are quite strong on that issue.

confusing? you try living here!

[Karthik]

Can it possibly mean that Labour would get about 300 seats, the tories 225 and about 80-100 to the Liberal democrats?

[dave angel]

easily, most analysts predict that labour will lose seats and that the libdems will gain votes, but as to how it will actually work out is impossible to foresee.

i think that the libdems and UKIP will make the headline gains, labour will lose votes through casual labour voters staying at home and labour activists not knocking on doors and the tories making a small increase. a further complication is that as Tony Blair has said he won't be fighting a fourth general election labour has a 'whos going to be prime minister' problem. much speculation has focused on when he goes.

because of the first past the post parlimentary system the total number of votes cast for each party is only an indicator, its what happens in each individual constituancy that matters.

lay your bets, a wide spread would be advisable.

[Karthik]

lay your bets, a wide spread would be advisable.

But one would have thought that Gordon Brown has already emerged as a future leader of Labour. People were saying this after his speech at Labour's annual conference.

[dave angel]

he should be the new leader, but there is a very powerful 'anyone but gordon' section within the party, also people who like blair may not like brown (he's much more traditional 'old labour') and so may not vote for labour because of that - though equally it will work the other way.

blair and brown are very different in their political philosophies, brown is probably brighter, but he doesn't have blair 'touchy-feely' wide appeal communication skills, but he has real gravitas.

it would also be wrong to totally discount the prospect of labours internicene warfare completely screwing up the election campaign, though i wouldn't bet on it.

[lwarmonger]

it would also be wrong to totally discount the prospect of labours internicene warfare completely screwing up the election campaign, though i wouldn't bet on it.

Is there a possibility that the labour party could fragment over the next few years?

[Ziska]

I'm rooting for the BNP. Put a bomb under the tories collective ****.

[Martin]

I'm rooting for the BNP. Put a bomb under the tories collective ****.

You cannot actually be serious - can you? The BNP are a load of racist pigs.

I have my money on labour. Unfortunately. Not who I will be voting...

Its unfortunate at the state of British politics at the moment.

Almost as bad as the US...

[dave angel]

Is there a possibility that the labour party could fragment over the next few years?

not really, though the activists and quite a few MP's can't stand 'new labour' and what it stands for, they remember going 20 odd years without an election victory. the labour civil war of the 1980's was something to behold, i mix in Scottish Labour circles and nobody i know would consider going back to that - it was very personal and very bitter, people just don't want to go there again so they'll just put up with the stuff they don't like. many of the 'hard' or just 'firm' left have left the party anyway, so the political arguments are less polarised, though still pretty wide ranging.

tories have been through a similar thing, but nothing close to the expulsions and deselections that labour went through. my view is that the tories haven't been 'hurt enough' by civil war and government policy to really unite, the labour government just hasn't made average tories angry enough to put aside the internicne squabbles.

i will treat the BNP comment with the contempt it deserves.

[Ziska]

Meh. I'm a conservative over here, and most likely would be in the UK, but I'm not really impressed with Michael Howard. I'd never vote Labor or LibDem, so I guess I'd vote either BNP or UKIP. That said, if the tories ran a decent local candidate I'd vote for them. So it all depends.